December 1, 2025 • 37 mins
The city of Medford has unveiled a plan that would move trash pickup to every other week instead of every week starting in July 2027. The change is part of the city’s expansion of its composting program. The city believes that a biweekly schedule would reduce waste and save money. Would you be in favor of a biweekly trash pickup? Why or why not?
*Medford Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn has denied our invitation to join the conversation*
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's Night Side with Dan ray I'm WBS Costin's Meet Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Oh that game is so over, mooy. I hope you're
not watching the game. That game is just over. Simple
as that. Anyway, before we get right back to this conversation,
and I would like to talk about this. I have
a lot of sound from this today, have Alex and
Jack if you'd like to join the conversation. I just
(00:27):
want to take a moment for those of you who
are involved in any charitable work, especially if you're a
legitimate five oh one C three. We do an annual
charity combine. It's the last hour or so, last couple
of hours of my broadcast year. This year it will
be on Tuesday night, December twenty third. If you are
(00:50):
involved in a charity, either in a leadership position or
as a volunteer, and you want to talk to the
head of your charity, all they have to do is
send me an email. Dan Ray d A Nria at
iHeartMedia dot com. If any of you need that email address,
Rob will give it to you. I need the name
(01:12):
of the person, the name of the charity, the name
of the person who would represent the charity. Now, please
do not send us an email and say that you've
heard about a charity that you think is a wonderful charity. No,
we do not call out on this. People have to
express an interest in being on the air. We will
(01:32):
interview them live. They don't have to come to the studio.
We'll do it via telephone. They'll be on the program
live Tuesday night, December twenty third, here on Night Side,
and they have a chance to talk about the name
of the charity, what group of people or what purpose
it serves, what its mission is, and what do they need.
Most charities either need more volunteers, or they need more funding,
(01:57):
or they may have a specific need and they can
make that appeal. They can give a website. They can
make people much more aware of their charity. So it's
Dan ray d A n are e A at iHeartMedia
dot com spelled I h e a r t n
e d i A dot com. If you have any questions,
called Rob and he will be able to give you
(02:20):
that information. Love to have you on. I will tell
you that we've already had a whole group of charities
who have inquired about being on or have asked to
be on this year. So far, everyone who is called
has been accommodated. They will come a point in time
where we will get filled up. And it's as simple
as that. If you want to be on, you have
(02:43):
to make a call now, or I should say, send
an email to me, but make sure that you could
either be the representative or that you can get the
name of the person who would be the representative. And
we're not calling out to people. We've done that other years,
and frankly it has been not worth the effort. So
(03:04):
I don't want to try to call someone and try
to convince them that they should join us. On Tuesday night,
December twenty third, sometime between ten and midnight, that's how
we end the broadcast year. We've done it now for
twelve years. This will be year number thirteen. Now we
are talking about this murder case which opened up today,
(03:25):
the Brian Walsh case. I'm looking for to see if
there are any people in my listening audience who think
that the story that Walsh has that his lawyer has
presented to the jury today, realizing that that's not evidence,
that is generally what they hope to prove. If there's
(03:47):
anything that you find credible about this, let me go
to Alex and Millis. Alex, you're a pretty open minded guy.
How are you tonight? Welcome?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
I'm not that open minded? How are you guys?
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Well, uh, what do you think about this tale?
Speaker 3 (04:04):
With a straight face? What's that?
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Well, I'm asking you what do you think about this tale?
Speaker 3 (04:10):
Well, for one, uh, he's already been convicted of occrod
or whatever, and you know, he loses credibility credibility there.
So how can any juror you know, uh, realistically come
to the conclusion that this guy's you know, he's he's
not really a good person, uh, based on you know,
(04:34):
his previous incarceration. And it's kind of like a lame uh,
lame explanation. Why uh you know, if if if, if
you know, a loved one, uh, you know, was passed away. Uh,
and the first thing you do is you panic and
(04:54):
and you say, oh, I'm gonna go hide the body.
Does that make any sense?
Speaker 2 (04:58):
None? To me? Now, to me, to be really honest
with you, I mean, I assume if at that moment
he said, oh my god, she may be dead, if
he was telling the truth, If he was telling the truth,
he would have immediately attempted to call nine to one
one and then try to begin some form of mouth
(05:19):
to mouth resuscitation or to try to find uh, you know,
start you know, upper body chest compressions, to try to
see if there are people who who do stop breathing
for some period of time and are there somehow they resuscitated.
I think we've all seen it on TV. Just to
try to but to do nothing, and then to have
(05:43):
in you know, in the next few hours, uh try
to find out how do I dispose of the body,
and then to go to I guess a local I'm
not sure if it was a home depot or or
whether it was one of those large box stores to
buy all the necessary items to dismember and dispose of
(06:07):
your wife's body.
Speaker 3 (06:10):
If they can prove even a miniscule amount of doubt,
does that mean that this guy could you know, could
get off?
Speaker 2 (06:17):
No? No, no, no, it's what what the the jury
has to believe all the elements of the crime beyond
a reasonable doubt, not any doubt, but a reasonable doubt.
And I don't see how any how this jury stays
out longer than half an hour based upon what we know.
(06:38):
And I just think that that normally in a case
like this, you and I suspect that they probably tried
to work a plea deal with the prosecution, but the prosecution,
which had was you know, had an abysmal failure for
a lot of reasons in the Karen Reid case. UH
(06:59):
did not want to take a case like this which
looks as if it's a slam dunk and cut this
guy any slack. Yeah, but it's gonna be it's gonna
be interesting, that's for sure. So you would not have
qualified for the jury.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
Alex, I just not. I would say, all the good
ones are taking you.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
All right. Thank you, Alex. Talk to you soon and
hope you had a great Thanksgiving, have a great night.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
I did a lot of a lot of food and
a lot of for family.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
That's good, good combination food, family, fun, football and festivities.
Thanks Alex. Good night. Uh. If you would like to
join the conversation six one, seven, two, five, four ten
thirty six one seven nine three one ten thirty, I
would be more than happy to have you join. If
you had ever called, tonight is a relatively easy night
to get through for I think on circumstances that probably
(07:52):
most of you can understand. There's several other topics that
I'm that I'm willing to go and talk about, but
this is one that to me defies logic. There's just
no logic here in my opinion, maybe in yours. Maybe
some of you see it differently. If you do feel
free six one, seven, two, five, four, ten thirty, triple
(08:14):
eight nine to nine, ten thirty and six one seven,
nine three one ten thirty. Coming right back on Nightside.
Speaker 1 (08:21):
Night Side with Dan Ray, I'm telling you Bzy Boston's
News Radio.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
We're talking about the Brian Walsh case. Probably many of
you did not listen to or hear the presentation in
court today, but it was uh to me, it was astonishing.
Let me see what Jack in Dyton has to say. Hey, Jack,
appreciate your calling in. You're next on Nightside, right ahead, Jack, Well.
Speaker 4 (08:48):
Thank you first for taking my call. Danny, I appreciate
it as usual.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
Very well.
Speaker 4 (08:53):
Let me say, let me say this. Let's just put
the facts on the table. The fact is that he
is guilty of of was it illegal disposal of a
human body.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
Pled guilty to that, and pled guilty to misleading investigators.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
Correct, alright, So so he's guilty on those, but clearly
he's innocent, right, now on the.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
Murder judge, he's presumed innocent.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Well, but he hasn't He hasn't been convicted yet.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
That's correct, But I just want to make sure I
didn't want anyone to be misled to think that the
jury to come back with a quick decision Jack go ahead.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
No, no, by no means. But I mean, so he's
presumed innocent at this point, and again, his attorney can
come out and opening statements to say whatever he wants to. Uh,
being able to convince a jury of that is a
completely different thing. And I mean, listen, based on the
(09:47):
actions that this guy took, how do you come back
from the loss of credibility in the fact that you're
alling to investigate is on the disappearance of your wife
saying that she you know, she left, I don't know
where she is, but he knew exactly where she was.
But let me ask you this question. If they don't
find a body, and I don't think they're going to,
(10:10):
can they you know, like, does that not make the
case a little more difficult for the Norfolk County DA's office.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
No, not under these circumstances. It doesn't. I mean, if
if let us say, you know, there was a period
of time where before the law I think it was
of its status. There was a period of time where
prosecutors were hesitant to bring a prosecution in the absence
(10:42):
of a body, because obviously no prosecutor wanted to find
out that someone merely disappeared and they convicted somebody on
circumstantial evidence, and then the person who had disappeared and
had not been murdered came back and walked into town.
No this there's there's this efficient circumstantial evidence here. As
(11:04):
a matter of fact, I think the overwhelming circumstantial evidence here. Yeah,
and we do know I think uh or there have
been reports put it more accurately that there were conversations
that were initiated by the defense uh to to arrange
some sort of a plea deal, and that the the
(11:27):
the government in this case, the Norfolk County d A's
office refused to you know, there was there was no give,
there was nothing to negotiate. They they want a murder
one conviction because they believe this is a horrific murder
one case.
Speaker 4 (11:42):
And we well, I think I think, yeah, I'm sorry,
go ahead, No, I've just.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
Was just saying what I had said last hour for
those who you know, people move in and come in
and out of our conversation that I think this is
an incredible tactic to take. And I'm sure that his
defense counsel, who we understand is experienced, has been very
(12:10):
careful in his conversations with this guy, because you don't
want to make the mistake as a lawyer and say, okay,
tell me what happened. Well, I just you know, I mean,
I lost it and I killed her and then I
tried to get rid of the body. I mean, that's
a huge mistake for a seasoned defense attorney to make
(12:30):
because at that point you have admitted to the crime,
and as an officer of the court that the defense
lawyer has an ethical obligation they can't mislead the court.
They're not going to turn the guy in and say, hey,
guess what he confessed or anything like that. But at
that point they probably would have to recuse themselves from
even handling the case. So you know that he could
(12:53):
have he could have said to to Wall's look, as
you know, nice to meet you. All of these circumstances
look pretty inculpatory, but I want to hear from you
what you want to tell me. Happened. Bear in mind
(13:14):
that what you tell me is going to potentially influence
my ability to represent you honestly in front of the court.
And you know you can telegraph to them in that
sort of set of circumstances that you know, don't you know?
If you confess to me, you put me in an
(13:35):
in an awkward position and you will probably have to
find a different lawyer. So this was the story that
this guy told. I don't find incredible.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Do you I concur with that statements?
Speaker 2 (13:50):
You know, and I don't know where the lawyer goes
from here and puts some It looks to me like
because this is the only guy, is Walsh who can
testify and can say, well, you know, she went up
to bed, but he told what he told the jury today,
which again is not evidence per se, but it's sort
of a roadmap that the that the jury can can
(14:13):
consider and basically says that you know, well let me
let me play this sound bite and I'll get your
reaction to it. Okay, this is cut twenty seven. Please,
I've cut number twenty seven.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
Brian Walsh?
Speaker 6 (14:31):
Why like to January fourth? Like to them January fifth,
lied to them on January seventh Bryan Walsh. When the
Lowells and by tools.
Speaker 7 (14:48):
Bryan Walsh and by tools Brian Walsh, beginning about four.
Speaker 8 (14:58):
Fifty four A began a frantic and tragic search that
you'll hear about. You'll hear the evidence that you will
hear evidence that those searches evolved from how best to
(15:19):
dispose the body to even darker something matter.
Speaker 6 (15:25):
As he wrestled with the fact that Anna Walsh was dead.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
And now I can't tell I hope that this has
been labeled correctly by my producer. Let me play one
other sound bite to you, which I believe for sure
was the defense lawyer cut twenty nine rob.
Speaker 7 (15:50):
On January first of twenty twenty three, Jim Mucklow left
the family home of Brian and Anna Walsh sometime between
one and one thirty in the morning.
Speaker 6 (16:07):
Anna and Brian Walsh continued to celebrate the news. They
went up to the bedroom. About an hour later.
Speaker 8 (16:20):
You will hear evidence that mister Walsh got up, went
back down the stairs.
Speaker 6 (16:26):
To clean themission. See evidence that he looked at his email.
Speaker 8 (16:37):
You'll hear evidence that he then returned to the bedroom,
intending nothing more than.
Speaker 6 (16:42):
To crawl into bed with Anna Walsh, the woman he loved.
Speaker 7 (16:47):
When he entered the bedroom and began to get into
the bed, he sensed something was wrong.
Speaker 6 (16:53):
You will hear evidence that it made no sense to him.
But he nudged Anna, his wife. She didn't respond. He
nutged her again, a little harder. She didn't respond.
Speaker 8 (17:07):
He nutsed her now in a frantic and panic reaction
to where she actually rolled off.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Then that's that story. Hang hang for you.
Speaker 9 (17:22):
You know what, I'm not buying any of it, Danny.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
I'ma be honest Ricky.
Speaker 10 (17:27):
I'm not buying any of it. And and it'd be
hot pressed to find twelve people or one person I
should say, you know what I mean, like it's the
the the evidence, and again we haven't heard it all.
Speaker 4 (17:40):
And I get it. He's innocent, court of guilty. But
I would not be able to be on that, Jerry,
because when they asked me, do you have an opinion?
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Yeah?
Speaker 10 (17:49):
I have an opinion.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
All right, Jack, I appreciate you taking the time on
this Monday night. I appreciate it. Talk to your good night, Okay,
gonna take a break. I'm more than happy to continue
to talk about this case, or I can switch topics.
You the audience will decide six one, seven, two, five,
four ten thirty six one seven, nine, three one ten thirty.
We will talk more, I'm sure later this week and
(18:17):
next week as well about the Brian Walsh case. But
it was an astonishing opening of this trial today, particularly
from the point of view of the defense attorneys. Feel
free to join the conversation. And if you think that
that story hangs together, I'm not here to make fun
of you. I'm just trying to find out if there's
anyone out there who could see this having transpired in
(18:41):
the context of everything that he did this way six
one seven thirty, six one seven, nine three one ten thirty.
Coming back on night Side.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
You're on night Side with Dan Ray on w BZY,
Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
Okay, back to the phone, you go. Let me talk
to Carol in Randolph, first female caller tonight. See what
Carol thinks. Carol, your thoughts on this horrific story.
Speaker 9 (19:11):
Oh, I just think he is totally guilty, and I just,
I mean, it's why can't people just give it up?
When you know I mean, oh man, I mean, I
think he was so jealous of her and her success
(19:32):
and everything, and why can't people just work it out,
do a divorce. It's not that hard, yeah, you know,
I mean it's walk away. I mean, I no doubt
in my mind he killed her. I know he did,
(19:52):
but I mean he was a loser and she was successful,
and I mean the ego got in the way or whatever.
But yeah, there's no way I'm buying his crap that
she passed away that night, No way.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
Yeah. And even if he did, if that was the
person you saw on the street, I mean, if you
were walking down the street and you saw someone unconscious
on the street, and you went over and you realized
this person has collapsed, the first instinct of a normal person,
a normal human being is to call nine one one
(20:31):
or to someone help, or to yell and you know,
anybody near, can someone call nine one one and try
to help that person.
Speaker 9 (20:40):
This is exactly exactly that's I mean, it's preposterous that
he is putting this defense on.
Speaker 4 (20:49):
Oh.
Speaker 9 (20:49):
I panicked because I thought they would blame me. Yeah,
I mean at first I thought he was going to
claim the insanity that he just went into like a
rage or something. No, I mean, this guy is just
out of his mind.
Speaker 2 (21:04):
Well, that that defense would have would have led. I'm
sure you know to a to an traps are not
reason not guilty by reason of insanity maybe, but that
means you're going to spend the rest of your life
in jail. I mean, in prison, there's there's no way out.
And so I'm sure facing that he didn't want to
deal with that. He's still got to deal with this
(21:24):
federal charge that you know, he's never gonna I don't
think he's ever going to see the light of day.
And as they say, I just what I'm focused on
is not so much the crime, but but how his
lawyer can actually, you know, put together a defense that
has any chance. I mean normally a jury will be out,
(21:45):
you know, for a couple of days and they deal
with the issues. I suspect this jury will come back
probably in record time.
Speaker 9 (21:52):
If you get my drift, oh ten minutes, Dan.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Yeah, well, they may want to have lunch, you know something.
Sometimes they do that.
Speaker 9 (22:03):
It's just no, it's preposterous that you think that the
jury is going to believe that somebody you loved passed
away and you didn't call nine one one like you said,
and oh, then I have to cover it up because
they'll blame me and like, are you crazy.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
No, God, that's sad. I mean, it's sad. We're laughing
at the defense here, but this is we can't forget
the fact that a woman lost her life so unnecessary.
Speaker 9 (22:35):
And that's what I just want to say to younger people,
like you're married. I mean, marriage is a tough road.
Just get in there and do it. Be committed to
ups the downs, but you don't kill yourself.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Right if the ups and downs become hills and mountains,
move on, move on, shake hands and say we gave
it a good try and let's move fun.
Speaker 9 (23:01):
Yeah, but they don't try so hard anymore.
Speaker 2 (23:04):
Yeah, Well, of course that's it's a little complicated now
that there's three kids who have lost their mom and
I suspect and we'll have lost their dad as well,
so this has to be horrific for those children, those
three boys as well. Carol is always a thank you
so much for giving giving us a call. And I
don't know if you've watched any of the football game tonight,
(23:27):
but it's a blowout and you've missed nothing good.
Speaker 9 (23:30):
Thanks so much, and thanks for the prayers for my husband.
You guys pulled them through.
Speaker 2 (23:36):
Thanks well, that's great. That's good to know. I did
not realize that. Okay, is he is he home and
everything at this point.
Speaker 9 (23:45):
No, it's going to be a long haul. But we'll
get them home.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Good.
Speaker 9 (23:49):
We'll get them home good for you you watching the
Patriots game. That is real tonight. We'll get them home.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
Well, I got you here, which is more? Which is
that's that's which I appreciate very much. Thanks so much, Carol.
We talk soon. Thanks, have a great Thanks, good night.
All right. It looks to me like everybody has had
everything they want to say about this, which is fine.
Sometimes we have those nights. I think it's I think
(24:16):
it's an interesting story. I can play a couple of
more lights, a couple of more soundbites here, which will
get me to where I want to get to. Rob
play cut twenty six. This is the prosecutor talking about
the case that they will put on against Brian Walsh.
(24:37):
This is cut number twenty six.
Speaker 5 (24:39):
Investigators will also explain to you that Brian Walsh's cell
phone on January third.
Speaker 6 (24:46):
Was located your.
Speaker 11 (24:47):
Apartment complexes and rock You'll see the sabils videos from
some of the self apartment complexes, including one of chatting wits,
you'll see someone going to the dumpser and.
Speaker 4 (25:00):
Kah.
Speaker 5 (25:00):
The messages will also tell you that on January fifth,
Bryan WASH's was in the area of dumpsters and a.
Speaker 6 (25:08):
Trash compactor.
Speaker 5 (25:10):
By his mother's apartment complex and swamster and that.
Speaker 11 (25:14):
This was before he was interviewed by Detective Schmidt later
that night.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
Again, this is this is a case that is just
just amazing. Here's a little bit more of a follow
up on that same same argument made by the Norfolk
County Prosecutor cut twenty six a roup.
Speaker 5 (25:40):
On January nine, the police went to those dumpsters and
they took those that trash compactor and those that dumpster
to a facility in Peev where they searched the contents
of both and they found and Memory's launch, blue gray
(26:03):
hunter boots, a black coat, a COVID vaccination card, would
Anna loss his name, rugs, a highbeck suit, a hammer, shears, snifs, a.
Speaker 6 (26:23):
Hatchet, and a hacks.
Speaker 5 (26:27):
The police will tell you that these items were packaged
and brought back to a laboratory and they were brought
there for examination.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
Again, basically the case being laid out. So if there's
no one else who wants to chime in in this case,
and I truly was hoping that there might have been
someone out there who found this case, even in the
slightest potentially credible. I'm going to move on. I'm going
(26:57):
to take quick break, and we come back and open
up a different topic. Don't open up a different topic
in the middle of an hour, but I will. In Medford,
there is a huge, huge story going on uh in
which the City of Medford has apparently made a commitment
through the Mayor's office that, beginning unless something changes, beginning
(27:21):
on July first, twenty twenty seven, a year and a
half for now, trash pickup in that city will no
longer occur on a weekly basis, but it will occur
every other week. I can't imagine. I can't imagine the
City of Medford entering into such a contract. We'll continue
(27:43):
on six one, seven thirty, six, seven, nine, three, one,
ten thirty back on Nightside right after this.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
It's Nightside with Dan Ray on w Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
So, Medford, Massachusetts, this nice community a little north of Boston.
I think most of us have been there at some point.
The mayor, her name is Mayor Brianna Longo Cohen. I
believe it's it's spelled ko e h N. I believe
it's coin or Cohen. We tried to get the mayor
(28:20):
to join us tonight, and unfortunately her press person told
us that she had some sort of a meeting to attend.
So she's welcome to come on any other night at
her convenience. But we did reach out to her, and
Medford has decided, or I should say maybe the mayor
of Medford has decided that about a year and a
(28:42):
half from now, Medford will no longer pick up trash
once a week. They will pick up trash twice a month,
every other week. I can't imagine what Medford will devolve
into at this time if they ever go through this. Now.
(29:05):
Apparently there's a lot of finger pointing, according to The
Boston Herald. Comedian Seth Myers has even jumped on the controversy. Myers,
I guess, on his late night talk show, said, the
mayor of Medford, Massachusetts, recently announced a new waste removal
(29:25):
program which will reduce trash pickups to once every two weeks.
But it's Massachusetts, Myers said Tuesday on his late night show,
So Bottle recycling is still every day. Well, I don't
know that that is going to be a line that
will be in Seth Myers's resume, you know, when his
(29:50):
late night show talk show. But it certainly to me
is pretty odd that a mayor in Massachusetts would feel
that his or her, in this case, her constituents can
go two weeks. We have, you know, in Massachusetts, we
have this recycling program where, at least in the town
(30:14):
where I live, you have they give you a green
barrel and a blue barrel, and in the blue barrel
goes trash, and in the green barrel goes items like
cardboard and newspapers and glass bottles, things that can be recycled.
And the barrels I guess they have. I guess it's
(30:35):
sixty four cubic feet of trash. So the barrels are
pretty good, you know. Now again, if you got a
really big family, I guess you got to get an
extra barrel or two. But for the most part that's
all you need. However, most weeks the barrels are pretty full.
And to think that you could actually go two weeks
(30:58):
or you could go from let's says being picked up
fifty two weeks a year to being picked up twenty
six weeks a year. Now some weeks you might have
for whatever reason, it might be away a couple of days.
So I'd love to hear from you, particularly if you're
out in Medford. What do you think about this program?
The story is that the mayor apparently thought she had
(31:24):
the authority to commit to this contract. Apparently she posted
a video on social media, according to the Herald story,
looking to calm some fears and some anger according to
her over trash contract and institutes the bi weekly trash pickup,
a move she said the city's Solid Waste task Force
(31:46):
recommended in twenty twenty two. So we were going to
ask the mayor tonight who is on this solid waste
task force? Who would have who would have written this?
I think the mayor was kind of pointing to someone else.
She said, we were deciding how to be transparent about this,
(32:10):
and hadn't discussed this since twenty twenty three publicly. That's
a good way to be transparent. So although I wanted
to do it sooner than later, we probably should have
separated it from the release that went out with the
good news about a two hundred thousand dollars grant. Under
the new service, residential sixty four gallon trash carts will
be collected every other week along with recycling at no charge,
(32:34):
beginning in July of twenty twenty seven. Officials say the
baseline will equate to thirty two gallons per household per week.
Residents could continue to lease additional sixty four trash in
ninety six gallon recycling carts. Moving to a bi weekly
collection collection would save the city over one million dollars
(32:55):
per year at a time when disposal costs arising now.
The city has scheduled community meetings in December and January
to discuss the plan, and the city council president said,
whether you think the change is a bad idea no
matter what, or potentially has some merits. The fact that
Medford's trash removal policy has gotten so much negative attention
(33:18):
in national and local news and was joked about a
national broadcast TV is a colossal communications failure and undermines
the trust of residents. Look a lot of politics probably
here going on, But I would like to hear from
you whether you live in Medford. Particularly love to hear
from me if I live at Medford, but or anywhere
(33:40):
else and explain to us how you would react. I
would assume that everyone in the sound of my voice,
and by the way, I'm told that we're having trouble
with our streaming devices tonight, and for that, I apologize profusely.
Don't understand why that's happening tonight, but I would hope
(34:00):
that our ACE technical staff is working on that as
much as they can. Again, electronics when it's working is wonderful.
When it breaks down, it's not quite as wonderful. So
I'd love to know from you. Could you tolerate a
bi weekly trash pickup if you live in most communities
(34:24):
in Massachusetts there are communities where you can still take
the trash to the dump, particularly down on the Cape.
I'm familiar with that, and probably in some places in
western Massachusetts where I live. Your trash pickup is covered
in your real estate taxes, in the taxes that you pay,
(34:46):
and where I live, you pay a lot of money
in real estate taxes, which covers everything fire, police, schools,
trash pickup, et cetera. Doesn't mean that the trash gets
picked up every week on time. That's one of the
problems in the community where I live. But that's a
story for another time. My question all of you is
(35:07):
what do you think of this? Let's assume it's successful
in Medford. I don't think it would be, but if
the mayor is intent on pushing this, and that would
have been a lot of the conversation we intended to
have with the mayor tonight to find out what is
the motivation. There has to be some motivation for this.
(35:27):
Maybe it's just saving money, but it's going to impose
a lot of inconvenience on the constituents in Medford. So
the question I would want to know is what is
the motivation? If it is just saving money, I hope
they're going to cut real estate taxes in Medford. I
don't think that will happen, but that would be my proposal.
And then if it's successful in Medford, do you think
(35:51):
it may end up in a community near you, indeed
your community? And how would you respond to that? That
is that is really my question. If I get Dave here,
let me try to grab Dave quickly if he wants
to talk about this topic, maybe he doesn't have to
wait through the news. Dave, what do you think about
this idea in Medford?
Speaker 3 (36:12):
I think it's lunacy, Dave.
Speaker 12 (36:13):
I'm Dan Ray. I think it's crazy. A lot of
a lot of towns and cities are an angel's hair
away from having rat problems, and they can ill afford this.
Boston has a permanent rat problem, as we all know. Yeah,
(36:34):
and a place that's getting busier and more dense cannot
afford to play this game.
Speaker 2 (36:43):
You know, I could just see that if you really
want to attract rats and raccoons and any other sort
of night creature for that better, any any creature that's
out there. This is a great idea. But again, we
had hoped to have the mayor or maybe even someone
from the mayor's office on tonight, but they were kind
(37:05):
enough to tell my producer, Marita uh that that she
was unavailable. But I want to talk about this, and
if you'd like to hang on, we could, we could
we could pick up our conversation on the other side
of the of the eleven o'clock News, if that's okay
with you, Dave, Sure sounds great, sounds great. We'll be
back with Dave and Chelmstread And we got other calls
(37:26):
coming in six, one, seven, two, five, thirty, six, one, seven, nine,
three one, ten thirty. My name is Dan Ray. This
is Night's Side trash pick up once every other week,
not once a week, once every other week. Could you
live with it? Could your community live with it? Join
the conversation back after this
It's Night Side with Dan ray I'm WBS Costin's Meet Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Oh that game is so over, mooy. I hope you're
not watching the game. That game is just over. Simple
as that. Anyway, before we get right back to this conversation,
and I would like to talk about this. I have
a lot of sound from this today, have Alex and
Jack if you'd like to join the conversation. I just
(00:27):
want to take a moment for those of you who
are involved in any charitable work, especially if you're a
legitimate five oh one C three. We do an annual
charity combine. It's the last hour or so, last couple
of hours of my broadcast year. This year it will
be on Tuesday night, December twenty third. If you are
(00:50):
involved in a charity, either in a leadership position or
as a volunteer, and you want to talk to the
head of your charity, all they have to do is
send me an email. Dan Ray d A Nria at
iHeartMedia dot com. If any of you need that email address,
Rob will give it to you. I need the name
(01:12):
of the person, the name of the charity, the name
of the person who would represent the charity. Now, please
do not send us an email and say that you've
heard about a charity that you think is a wonderful charity. No,
we do not call out on this. People have to
express an interest in being on the air. We will
(01:32):
interview them live. They don't have to come to the studio.
We'll do it via telephone. They'll be on the program
live Tuesday night, December twenty third, here on Night Side,
and they have a chance to talk about the name
of the charity, what group of people or what purpose
it serves, what its mission is, and what do they need.
Most charities either need more volunteers, or they need more funding,
(01:57):
or they may have a specific need and they can
make that appeal. They can give a website. They can
make people much more aware of their charity. So it's
Dan ray d A n are e A at iHeartMedia
dot com spelled I h e a r t n
e d i A dot com. If you have any questions,
called Rob and he will be able to give you
(02:20):
that information. Love to have you on. I will tell
you that we've already had a whole group of charities
who have inquired about being on or have asked to
be on this year. So far, everyone who is called
has been accommodated. They will come a point in time
where we will get filled up. And it's as simple
as that. If you want to be on, you have
(02:43):
to make a call now, or I should say, send
an email to me, but make sure that you could
either be the representative or that you can get the
name of the person who would be the representative. And
we're not calling out to people. We've done that other years,
and frankly it has been not worth the effort. So
(03:04):
I don't want to try to call someone and try
to convince them that they should join us. On Tuesday night,
December twenty third, sometime between ten and midnight, that's how
we end the broadcast year. We've done it now for
twelve years. This will be year number thirteen. Now we
are talking about this murder case which opened up today,
(03:25):
the Brian Walsh case. I'm looking for to see if
there are any people in my listening audience who think
that the story that Walsh has that his lawyer has
presented to the jury today, realizing that that's not evidence,
that is generally what they hope to prove. If there's
(03:47):
anything that you find credible about this, let me go
to Alex and Millis. Alex, you're a pretty open minded guy.
How are you tonight? Welcome?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
I'm not that open minded? How are you guys?
Speaker 2 (04:00):
Well, uh, what do you think about this tale?
Speaker 3 (04:04):
With a straight face? What's that?
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Well, I'm asking you what do you think about this tale?
Speaker 3 (04:10):
Well, for one, uh, he's already been convicted of occrod
or whatever, and you know, he loses credibility credibility there.
So how can any juror you know, uh, realistically come
to the conclusion that this guy's you know, he's he's
not really a good person, uh, based on you know,
(04:34):
his previous incarceration. And it's kind of like a lame uh,
lame explanation. Why uh you know, if if if, if
you know, a loved one, uh, you know, was passed away. Uh,
and the first thing you do is you panic and
(04:54):
and you say, oh, I'm gonna go hide the body.
Does that make any sense?
Speaker 2 (04:58):
None? To me? Now, to me, to be really honest
with you, I mean, I assume if at that moment
he said, oh my god, she may be dead, if
he was telling the truth, If he was telling the truth,
he would have immediately attempted to call nine to one
one and then try to begin some form of mouth
(05:19):
to mouth resuscitation or to try to find uh, you know,
start you know, upper body chest compressions, to try to
see if there are people who who do stop breathing
for some period of time and are there somehow they resuscitated.
I think we've all seen it on TV. Just to
try to but to do nothing, and then to have
(05:43):
in you know, in the next few hours, uh try
to find out how do I dispose of the body,
and then to go to I guess a local I'm
not sure if it was a home depot or or
whether it was one of those large box stores to
buy all the necessary items to dismember and dispose of
(06:07):
your wife's body.
Speaker 3 (06:10):
If they can prove even a miniscule amount of doubt,
does that mean that this guy could you know, could
get off?
Speaker 2 (06:17):
No? No, no, no, it's what what the the jury
has to believe all the elements of the crime beyond
a reasonable doubt, not any doubt, but a reasonable doubt.
And I don't see how any how this jury stays
out longer than half an hour based upon what we know.
(06:38):
And I just think that that normally in a case
like this, you and I suspect that they probably tried
to work a plea deal with the prosecution, but the prosecution,
which had was you know, had an abysmal failure for
a lot of reasons in the Karen Reid case. UH
(06:59):
did not want to take a case like this which
looks as if it's a slam dunk and cut this
guy any slack. Yeah, but it's gonna be it's gonna
be interesting, that's for sure. So you would not have
qualified for the jury.
Speaker 3 (07:16):
Alex, I just not. I would say, all the good
ones are taking you.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
All right. Thank you, Alex. Talk to you soon and
hope you had a great Thanksgiving, have a great night.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
I did a lot of a lot of food and
a lot of for family.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
That's good, good combination food, family, fun, football and festivities.
Thanks Alex. Good night. Uh. If you would like to
join the conversation six one, seven, two, five, four ten
thirty six one seven nine three one ten thirty, I
would be more than happy to have you join. If
you had ever called, tonight is a relatively easy night
to get through for I think on circumstances that probably
(07:52):
most of you can understand. There's several other topics that
I'm that I'm willing to go and talk about, but
this is one that to me defies logic. There's just
no logic here in my opinion, maybe in yours. Maybe
some of you see it differently. If you do feel
free six one, seven, two, five, four, ten thirty, triple
(08:14):
eight nine to nine, ten thirty and six one seven,
nine three one ten thirty. Coming right back on Nightside.
Speaker 1 (08:21):
Night Side with Dan Ray, I'm telling you Bzy Boston's
News Radio.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
We're talking about the Brian Walsh case. Probably many of
you did not listen to or hear the presentation in
court today, but it was uh to me, it was astonishing.
Let me see what Jack in Dyton has to say. Hey, Jack,
appreciate your calling in. You're next on Nightside, right ahead, Jack, Well.
Speaker 4 (08:48):
Thank you first for taking my call. Danny, I appreciate
it as usual.
Speaker 2 (08:53):
Very well.
Speaker 4 (08:53):
Let me say, let me say this. Let's just put
the facts on the table. The fact is that he
is guilty of of was it illegal disposal of a
human body.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
Pled guilty to that, and pled guilty to misleading investigators.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
Correct, alright, So so he's guilty on those, but clearly
he's innocent, right, now on the.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
Murder judge, he's presumed innocent.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Well, but he hasn't He hasn't been convicted yet.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
That's correct, But I just want to make sure I
didn't want anyone to be misled to think that the
jury to come back with a quick decision Jack go ahead.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
No, no, by no means. But I mean, so he's
presumed innocent at this point, and again, his attorney can
come out and opening statements to say whatever he wants to. Uh,
being able to convince a jury of that is a
completely different thing. And I mean, listen, based on the
(09:47):
actions that this guy took, how do you come back
from the loss of credibility in the fact that you're
alling to investigate is on the disappearance of your wife
saying that she you know, she left, I don't know
where she is, but he knew exactly where she was.
But let me ask you this question. If they don't
find a body, and I don't think they're going to,
(10:10):
can they you know, like, does that not make the
case a little more difficult for the Norfolk County DA's office.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
No, not under these circumstances. It doesn't. I mean, if
if let us say, you know, there was a period
of time where before the law I think it was
of its status. There was a period of time where
prosecutors were hesitant to bring a prosecution in the absence
(10:42):
of a body, because obviously no prosecutor wanted to find
out that someone merely disappeared and they convicted somebody on
circumstantial evidence, and then the person who had disappeared and
had not been murdered came back and walked into town.
No this there's there's this efficient circumstantial evidence here. As
(11:04):
a matter of fact, I think the overwhelming circumstantial evidence here. Yeah,
and we do know I think uh or there have
been reports put it more accurately that there were conversations
that were initiated by the defense uh to to arrange
some sort of a plea deal, and that the the
(11:27):
the government in this case, the Norfolk County d A's
office refused to you know, there was there was no give,
there was nothing to negotiate. They they want a murder
one conviction because they believe this is a horrific murder
one case.
Speaker 4 (11:42):
And we well, I think I think, yeah, I'm sorry,
go ahead, No, I've just.
Speaker 2 (11:47):
Was just saying what I had said last hour for
those who you know, people move in and come in
and out of our conversation that I think this is
an incredible tactic to take. And I'm sure that his
defense counsel, who we understand is experienced, has been very
(12:10):
careful in his conversations with this guy, because you don't
want to make the mistake as a lawyer and say, okay,
tell me what happened. Well, I just you know, I mean,
I lost it and I killed her and then I
tried to get rid of the body. I mean, that's
a huge mistake for a seasoned defense attorney to make
(12:30):
because at that point you have admitted to the crime,
and as an officer of the court that the defense
lawyer has an ethical obligation they can't mislead the court.
They're not going to turn the guy in and say, hey,
guess what he confessed or anything like that. But at
that point they probably would have to recuse themselves from
even handling the case. So you know that he could
(12:53):
have he could have said to to Wall's look, as
you know, nice to meet you. All of these circumstances
look pretty inculpatory, but I want to hear from you
what you want to tell me. Happened. Bear in mind
(13:14):
that what you tell me is going to potentially influence
my ability to represent you honestly in front of the court.
And you know you can telegraph to them in that
sort of set of circumstances that you know, don't you know?
If you confess to me, you put me in an
(13:35):
in an awkward position and you will probably have to
find a different lawyer. So this was the story that
this guy told. I don't find incredible.
Speaker 3 (13:47):
Do you I concur with that statements?
Speaker 2 (13:50):
You know, and I don't know where the lawyer goes
from here and puts some It looks to me like
because this is the only guy, is Walsh who can
testify and can say, well, you know, she went up
to bed, but he told what he told the jury today,
which again is not evidence per se, but it's sort
of a roadmap that the that the jury can can
(14:13):
consider and basically says that you know, well let me
let me play this sound bite and I'll get your
reaction to it. Okay, this is cut twenty seven. Please,
I've cut number twenty seven.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
Brian Walsh?
Speaker 6 (14:31):
Why like to January fourth? Like to them January fifth,
lied to them on January seventh Bryan Walsh. When the
Lowells and by tools.
Speaker 7 (14:48):
Bryan Walsh and by tools Brian Walsh, beginning about four.
Speaker 8 (14:58):
Fifty four A began a frantic and tragic search that
you'll hear about. You'll hear the evidence that you will
hear evidence that those searches evolved from how best to
(15:19):
dispose the body to even darker something matter.
Speaker 6 (15:25):
As he wrestled with the fact that Anna Walsh was dead.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
And now I can't tell I hope that this has
been labeled correctly by my producer. Let me play one
other sound bite to you, which I believe for sure
was the defense lawyer cut twenty nine rob.
Speaker 7 (15:50):
On January first of twenty twenty three, Jim Mucklow left
the family home of Brian and Anna Walsh sometime between
one and one thirty in the morning.
Speaker 6 (16:07):
Anna and Brian Walsh continued to celebrate the news. They
went up to the bedroom. About an hour later.
Speaker 8 (16:20):
You will hear evidence that mister Walsh got up, went
back down the stairs.
Speaker 6 (16:26):
To clean themission. See evidence that he looked at his email.
Speaker 8 (16:37):
You'll hear evidence that he then returned to the bedroom,
intending nothing more than.
Speaker 6 (16:42):
To crawl into bed with Anna Walsh, the woman he loved.
Speaker 7 (16:47):
When he entered the bedroom and began to get into
the bed, he sensed something was wrong.
Speaker 6 (16:53):
You will hear evidence that it made no sense to him.
But he nudged Anna, his wife. She didn't respond. He
nutged her again, a little harder. She didn't respond.
Speaker 8 (17:07):
He nutsed her now in a frantic and panic reaction
to where she actually rolled off.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Then that's that story. Hang hang for you.
Speaker 9 (17:22):
You know what, I'm not buying any of it, Danny.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
I'ma be honest Ricky.
Speaker 10 (17:27):
I'm not buying any of it. And and it'd be
hot pressed to find twelve people or one person I
should say, you know what I mean, like it's the
the the evidence, and again we haven't heard it all.
Speaker 4 (17:40):
And I get it. He's innocent, court of guilty. But
I would not be able to be on that, Jerry,
because when they asked me, do you have an opinion?
Speaker 2 (17:49):
Yeah?
Speaker 10 (17:49):
I have an opinion.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
All right, Jack, I appreciate you taking the time on
this Monday night. I appreciate it. Talk to your good night, Okay,
gonna take a break. I'm more than happy to continue
to talk about this case, or I can switch topics.
You the audience will decide six one, seven, two, five,
four ten thirty six one seven, nine, three one ten thirty.
We will talk more, I'm sure later this week and
(18:17):
next week as well about the Brian Walsh case. But
it was an astonishing opening of this trial today, particularly
from the point of view of the defense attorneys. Feel
free to join the conversation. And if you think that
that story hangs together, I'm not here to make fun
of you. I'm just trying to find out if there's
anyone out there who could see this having transpired in
(18:41):
the context of everything that he did this way six
one seven thirty, six one seven, nine three one ten thirty.
Coming back on night Side.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
You're on night Side with Dan Ray on w BZY,
Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
Okay, back to the phone, you go. Let me talk
to Carol in Randolph, first female caller tonight. See what
Carol thinks. Carol, your thoughts on this horrific story.
Speaker 9 (19:11):
Oh, I just think he is totally guilty, and I just,
I mean, it's why can't people just give it up?
When you know I mean, oh man, I mean, I
think he was so jealous of her and her success
(19:32):
and everything, and why can't people just work it out,
do a divorce. It's not that hard, yeah, you know,
I mean it's walk away. I mean, I no doubt
in my mind he killed her. I know he did,
(19:52):
but I mean he was a loser and she was successful,
and I mean the ego got in the way or whatever.
But yeah, there's no way I'm buying his crap that
she passed away that night, No way.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
Yeah. And even if he did, if that was the
person you saw on the street, I mean, if you
were walking down the street and you saw someone unconscious
on the street, and you went over and you realized
this person has collapsed, the first instinct of a normal person,
a normal human being is to call nine one one
(20:31):
or to someone help, or to yell and you know,
anybody near, can someone call nine one one and try
to help that person.
Speaker 9 (20:40):
This is exactly exactly that's I mean, it's preposterous that
he is putting this defense on.
Speaker 4 (20:49):
Oh.
Speaker 9 (20:49):
I panicked because I thought they would blame me. Yeah,
I mean at first I thought he was going to
claim the insanity that he just went into like a
rage or something. No, I mean, this guy is just
out of his mind.
Speaker 2 (21:04):
Well, that that defense would have would have led. I'm
sure you know to a to an traps are not
reason not guilty by reason of insanity maybe, but that
means you're going to spend the rest of your life
in jail. I mean, in prison, there's there's no way out.
And so I'm sure facing that he didn't want to
deal with that. He's still got to deal with this
(21:24):
federal charge that you know, he's never gonna I don't
think he's ever going to see the light of day.
And as they say, I just what I'm focused on
is not so much the crime, but but how his
lawyer can actually, you know, put together a defense that
has any chance. I mean normally a jury will be out,
(21:45):
you know, for a couple of days and they deal
with the issues. I suspect this jury will come back
probably in record time.
Speaker 9 (21:52):
If you get my drift, oh ten minutes, Dan.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Yeah, well, they may want to have lunch, you know something.
Sometimes they do that.
Speaker 9 (22:03):
It's just no, it's preposterous that you think that the
jury is going to believe that somebody you loved passed
away and you didn't call nine one one like you said,
and oh, then I have to cover it up because
they'll blame me and like, are you crazy.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
No, God, that's sad. I mean, it's sad. We're laughing
at the defense here, but this is we can't forget
the fact that a woman lost her life so unnecessary.
Speaker 9 (22:35):
And that's what I just want to say to younger people,
like you're married. I mean, marriage is a tough road.
Just get in there and do it. Be committed to
ups the downs, but you don't kill yourself.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Right if the ups and downs become hills and mountains,
move on, move on, shake hands and say we gave
it a good try and let's move fun.
Speaker 9 (23:01):
Yeah, but they don't try so hard anymore.
Speaker 2 (23:04):
Yeah, Well, of course that's it's a little complicated now
that there's three kids who have lost their mom and
I suspect and we'll have lost their dad as well,
so this has to be horrific for those children, those
three boys as well. Carol is always a thank you
so much for giving giving us a call. And I
don't know if you've watched any of the football game tonight,
(23:27):
but it's a blowout and you've missed nothing good.
Speaker 9 (23:30):
Thanks so much, and thanks for the prayers for my husband.
You guys pulled them through.
Speaker 2 (23:36):
Thanks well, that's great. That's good to know. I did
not realize that. Okay, is he is he home and
everything at this point.
Speaker 9 (23:45):
No, it's going to be a long haul. But we'll
get them home.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
Good.
Speaker 9 (23:49):
We'll get them home good for you you watching the
Patriots game. That is real tonight. We'll get them home.
Speaker 2 (23:56):
Well, I got you here, which is more? Which is
that's that's which I appreciate very much. Thanks so much, Carol.
We talk soon. Thanks, have a great Thanks, good night.
All right. It looks to me like everybody has had
everything they want to say about this, which is fine.
Sometimes we have those nights. I think it's I think
(24:16):
it's an interesting story. I can play a couple of
more lights, a couple of more soundbites here, which will
get me to where I want to get to. Rob
play cut twenty six. This is the prosecutor talking about
the case that they will put on against Brian Walsh.
(24:37):
This is cut number twenty six.
Speaker 5 (24:39):
Investigators will also explain to you that Brian Walsh's cell
phone on January third.
Speaker 6 (24:46):
Was located your.
Speaker 11 (24:47):
Apartment complexes and rock You'll see the sabils videos from
some of the self apartment complexes, including one of chatting wits,
you'll see someone going to the dumpser and.
Speaker 4 (25:00):
Kah.
Speaker 5 (25:00):
The messages will also tell you that on January fifth,
Bryan WASH's was in the area of dumpsters and a.
Speaker 6 (25:08):
Trash compactor.
Speaker 5 (25:10):
By his mother's apartment complex and swamster and that.
Speaker 11 (25:14):
This was before he was interviewed by Detective Schmidt later
that night.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
Again, this is this is a case that is just
just amazing. Here's a little bit more of a follow
up on that same same argument made by the Norfolk
County Prosecutor cut twenty six a roup.
Speaker 5 (25:40):
On January nine, the police went to those dumpsters and
they took those that trash compactor and those that dumpster
to a facility in Peev where they searched the contents
of both and they found and Memory's launch, blue gray
(26:03):
hunter boots, a black coat, a COVID vaccination card, would
Anna loss his name, rugs, a highbeck suit, a hammer, shears, snifs, a.
Speaker 6 (26:23):
Hatchet, and a hacks.
Speaker 5 (26:27):
The police will tell you that these items were packaged
and brought back to a laboratory and they were brought
there for examination.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
Again, basically the case being laid out. So if there's
no one else who wants to chime in in this case,
and I truly was hoping that there might have been
someone out there who found this case, even in the
slightest potentially credible. I'm going to move on. I'm going
(26:57):
to take quick break, and we come back and open
up a different topic. Don't open up a different topic
in the middle of an hour, but I will. In Medford,
there is a huge, huge story going on uh in
which the City of Medford has apparently made a commitment
through the Mayor's office that, beginning unless something changes, beginning
(27:21):
on July first, twenty twenty seven, a year and a
half for now, trash pickup in that city will no
longer occur on a weekly basis, but it will occur
every other week. I can't imagine. I can't imagine the
City of Medford entering into such a contract. We'll continue
(27:43):
on six one, seven thirty, six, seven, nine, three, one,
ten thirty back on Nightside right after this.
Speaker 1 (27:51):
It's Nightside with Dan Ray on w Boston's news radio.
Speaker 2 (27:57):
So, Medford, Massachusetts, this nice community a little north of Boston.
I think most of us have been there at some point.
The mayor, her name is Mayor Brianna Longo Cohen. I
believe it's it's spelled ko e h N. I believe
it's coin or Cohen. We tried to get the mayor
(28:20):
to join us tonight, and unfortunately her press person told
us that she had some sort of a meeting to attend.
So she's welcome to come on any other night at
her convenience. But we did reach out to her, and
Medford has decided, or I should say maybe the mayor
of Medford has decided that about a year and a
(28:42):
half from now, Medford will no longer pick up trash
once a week. They will pick up trash twice a month,
every other week. I can't imagine what Medford will devolve
into at this time if they ever go through this. Now.
(29:05):
Apparently there's a lot of finger pointing, according to The
Boston Herald. Comedian Seth Myers has even jumped on the controversy. Myers,
I guess, on his late night talk show, said, the
mayor of Medford, Massachusetts, recently announced a new waste removal
(29:25):
program which will reduce trash pickups to once every two weeks.
But it's Massachusetts, Myers said Tuesday on his late night show,
So Bottle recycling is still every day. Well, I don't
know that that is going to be a line that
will be in Seth Myers's resume, you know, when his
(29:50):
late night show talk show. But it certainly to me
is pretty odd that a mayor in Massachusetts would feel
that his or her, in this case, her constituents can
go two weeks. We have, you know, in Massachusetts, we
have this recycling program where, at least in the town
(30:14):
where I live, you have they give you a green
barrel and a blue barrel, and in the blue barrel
goes trash, and in the green barrel goes items like
cardboard and newspapers and glass bottles, things that can be recycled.
And the barrels I guess they have. I guess it's
(30:35):
sixty four cubic feet of trash. So the barrels are
pretty good, you know. Now again, if you got a
really big family, I guess you got to get an
extra barrel or two. But for the most part that's
all you need. However, most weeks the barrels are pretty full.
And to think that you could actually go two weeks
(30:58):
or you could go from let's says being picked up
fifty two weeks a year to being picked up twenty
six weeks a year. Now some weeks you might have
for whatever reason, it might be away a couple of days.
So I'd love to hear from you, particularly if you're
out in Medford. What do you think about this program?
The story is that the mayor apparently thought she had
(31:24):
the authority to commit to this contract. Apparently she posted
a video on social media, according to the Herald story,
looking to calm some fears and some anger according to
her over trash contract and institutes the bi weekly trash pickup,
a move she said the city's Solid Waste task Force
(31:46):
recommended in twenty twenty two. So we were going to
ask the mayor tonight who is on this solid waste
task force? Who would have who would have written this?
I think the mayor was kind of pointing to someone else.
She said, we were deciding how to be transparent about this,
(32:10):
and hadn't discussed this since twenty twenty three publicly. That's
a good way to be transparent. So although I wanted
to do it sooner than later, we probably should have
separated it from the release that went out with the
good news about a two hundred thousand dollars grant. Under
the new service, residential sixty four gallon trash carts will
be collected every other week along with recycling at no charge,
(32:34):
beginning in July of twenty twenty seven. Officials say the
baseline will equate to thirty two gallons per household per week.
Residents could continue to lease additional sixty four trash in
ninety six gallon recycling carts. Moving to a bi weekly
collection collection would save the city over one million dollars
(32:55):
per year at a time when disposal costs arising now.
The city has scheduled community meetings in December and January
to discuss the plan, and the city council president said,
whether you think the change is a bad idea no
matter what, or potentially has some merits. The fact that
Medford's trash removal policy has gotten so much negative attention
(33:18):
in national and local news and was joked about a
national broadcast TV is a colossal communications failure and undermines
the trust of residents. Look a lot of politics probably
here going on, But I would like to hear from
you whether you live in Medford. Particularly love to hear
from me if I live at Medford, but or anywhere
(33:40):
else and explain to us how you would react. I
would assume that everyone in the sound of my voice,
and by the way, I'm told that we're having trouble
with our streaming devices tonight, and for that, I apologize profusely.
Don't understand why that's happening tonight, but I would hope
(34:00):
that our ACE technical staff is working on that as
much as they can. Again, electronics when it's working is wonderful.
When it breaks down, it's not quite as wonderful. So
I'd love to know from you. Could you tolerate a
bi weekly trash pickup if you live in most communities
(34:24):
in Massachusetts there are communities where you can still take
the trash to the dump, particularly down on the Cape.
I'm familiar with that, and probably in some places in
western Massachusetts where I live. Your trash pickup is covered
in your real estate taxes, in the taxes that you pay,
(34:46):
and where I live, you pay a lot of money
in real estate taxes, which covers everything fire, police, schools,
trash pickup, et cetera. Doesn't mean that the trash gets
picked up every week on time. That's one of the
problems in the community where I live. But that's a
story for another time. My question all of you is
(35:07):
what do you think of this? Let's assume it's successful
in Medford. I don't think it would be, but if
the mayor is intent on pushing this, and that would
have been a lot of the conversation we intended to
have with the mayor tonight to find out what is
the motivation. There has to be some motivation for this.
(35:27):
Maybe it's just saving money, but it's going to impose
a lot of inconvenience on the constituents in Medford. So
the question I would want to know is what is
the motivation? If it is just saving money, I hope
they're going to cut real estate taxes in Medford. I
don't think that will happen, but that would be my proposal.
And then if it's successful in Medford, do you think
(35:51):
it may end up in a community near you, indeed
your community? And how would you respond to that? That
is that is really my question. If I get Dave here,
let me try to grab Dave quickly if he wants
to talk about this topic, maybe he doesn't have to
wait through the news. Dave, what do you think about
this idea in Medford?
Speaker 3 (36:12):
I think it's lunacy, Dave.
Speaker 12 (36:13):
I'm Dan Ray. I think it's crazy. A lot of
a lot of towns and cities are an angel's hair
away from having rat problems, and they can ill afford this.
Boston has a permanent rat problem, as we all know. Yeah,
(36:34):
and a place that's getting busier and more dense cannot
afford to play this game.
Speaker 2 (36:43):
You know, I could just see that if you really
want to attract rats and raccoons and any other sort
of night creature for that better, any any creature that's
out there. This is a great idea. But again, we
had hoped to have the mayor or maybe even someone
from the mayor's office on tonight, but they were kind
(37:05):
enough to tell my producer, Marita uh that that she
was unavailable. But I want to talk about this, and
if you'd like to hang on, we could, we could
we could pick up our conversation on the other side
of the of the eleven o'clock News, if that's okay
with you, Dave, Sure sounds great, sounds great. We'll be
back with Dave and Chelmstread And we got other calls
(37:26):
coming in six, one, seven, two, five, thirty, six, one, seven, nine,
three one, ten thirty. My name is Dan Ray. This
is Night's Side trash pick up once every other week,
not once a week, once every other week. Could you
live with it? Could your community live with it? Join
the conversation back after this
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.